tv [untitled] November 16, 2010 3:30pm-4:00pm PST
supervisor chiu: thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in support of the district? let me now ask if there are any members of the public that wish to speak against the proposal. please step up. >> hello, supervisors. i'm a merchant on ocean avenue. i'm opposed to this cbd. i do not believe we need it at this time. pretty difficult to do business there, not because of some of the things mentioned -- is mostly homeowners that want this, not the merchants. there are several other merchants that could not be here today. the problem seems to be that we are not just -- we just are not
the right type of business district for this. it seems to work well at places like union square. macy's and places like that can avoid this, and we cannot. we have never needed anything like this, and it puts an unnecessary burden on persons like myself and my fellow merchants. please do not vote for it. maybe some day in the future. not now. thank you very much. supervisor chiu: next speaker. >> my name is mildred rose, and i have been a property owner for 28 years. i think that this is not the right time for this cbd. i am diametrically opposed to it because of the struggling
merchants right now trying to make ends meet. we have a bike lane from leap street all the way over to harold, and it is prohibiting properties, business owners to have clients to come into their businesses, and i wrote to the supervisor regarding this issue. we have not yet heard from you, but i do not think this is the right time to have this initiative passed because of the economy and the property values are going down. we cannot increase rent because of the rent control. i have two disabled tenants, and i cannot raise their rent. this is not a timely moment for anything of this nature to be passed, and i'd like to have the board reconsider this initiative at this time.
we can clean up our property. we have done it over the years. it does take civic pride to do that. thank you. supervisor chiu: thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak against the proposed assessment? at this time, we are not going to close the hearing. supervisor avalos, i understand you have a motion to continue. supervisor avalos: that is right. i want to thank community members on both sides of the issue for coming out today and for your consideration of the cbd and your work to help establish it. it is a difficult process, and i understand the concerns people have. i do truly believed it will be a great benefit for the neighborhood. this is also on the border, of course, of district 11, district 7. supervisor elsbernd's district as well, and i do believe we
will see some benefit out of the cbd if we have the opportunity to establish it. elsewhere, opposition has turned around once they see the benefit that has been achieved through the implementation of the cbd. i would like to continue this item through december 14 to allow greater consideration from the community and allow balloting to continue. supervisor chiu: supervisor avalos has asked to continue these items. without objection, the items will be continued to that date. if we could now move to our 3:30 special commendation. we have a special commendation being offered by supervisor alioto-pier.
supervisor, are we almost ready to go? if not, we could go back to item 25. ok, supervisor alioto-pier has asked us to refer back to 25. supervisor alioto-pier: we have some outstanding questions from the assessor's office, and i was hoping we could rescind the vote and continue it a week. i would appreciate just one more week to get some clear answers from the assessor. supervisor chiu: supervisor
alioto-pier has made a motion to rescind the vote on item 25. without objection, that item's boat is rescinded -- vote is r3escinde -- vote is rescinded. without objection, the item will be continued for one week. now, if we could go back to our 3:30 special order, commendation by supervisor alioto-pier. supervisor alioto-pier: great, thank you very much. if i could welcome ms. tilly. come on up. [applause] and if there are any students of hers, past or present, who would like to come up and stand -- come on, you guys -- stand with her.
everyone is so little. i should tell you that when all the little girls walked in with their tutus, bevan was upset that he did not wear his. you have a supervisor who is with you in hard. colleagues, it is my distinct pleasure today to honor a beloved san franciscan. miss tilly, as she is known to the thousands of children who have studied with her, began her studies with the san francisco ballet at the age of 11 and first danced in "the
nutcracker" as a buffoon. when she was 15, she became a member of the san francisco ballet company. she went with the company on the united states department was of africa, the far east, the middle east, and south america. her teaching career began at the age of 13 when she was appointed apprentice teacher to the pre-ballet program. after performing professionally with the ballet, she joins the faculty of the school in 1963. ballet with miss tilly was born five years later and continues to this day. thousands of little girls and boys have passed through her doors, and she has never once had to advertise. and we all know that. all the mothers in this room who have their children in her
class, it was all by word of mouth. mothers told mothers. little girls told friends, and she built a reputation as the city's preeminent ballet instructor for small children. she also offers scholarships to many children. her goal is not to turn all of her students in two professional dancers but to instill in them a sense of confidence and discipline that they will carry with them throughout their lives. her main goal is to provide every child with a wonderful and magical experience through dance and music that will stay with them always. as one of her former students stated, studying with her was like being in the presence of a real dollar in a. she was always patient and never raised her voice. behaving badly would have seemed rude. she says that her greatest achievement is creating a career doing what she loved. on behalf of the thousands of parents and children, we are so
grateful you chose this as your career. we honor your dedication and commitment to our children, to san francisco, and we thank you for using your talent to give back to the community. [applause] with that, as a mom with three little people who have gone through your program -- my son, sitting over there very embarrassed, my daughter over there also very embarrassed, and little ballantine in her -- little valentina in her little tutu. to all of the moms out there who look at miss tilly and wish we
could look that good. >> it is a great honor to be recognized by the city of san francisco, thanks to your generosity. michaela is a woman i have admired for many years and makes this award really special for me. you took most of my speech because i was going to say a little bit about my whole point of my school, and i think you said it very beautifully. the purpose of my school is to help students gain the necessary schools of listening, discipline, and confidence to benefit all aspects of their lives, and most of all, to give each child a magical experience that will stay with her always. i thank you so much for this opportunity, and my family is here, too. four of my 6 grandchildren are back here. could you stand up? nick and matt and jamie.
could you bring my littlest one in front please? this is my youngest grandchild coming down the aisle. here comes huck. there he is. there is the littlest grandson. so my family is here, and all of the children or part of the children that i love, and thank you so much for this opportunity. thank you, children. should we take a vow -- bow over there? let's go take a bow. [applause]
[applause] supervisor chiu: that concludes our special commendation. with that, if we could move to our committee reports. specifically calling up item 47. >> item 47 was considered by the land use and economic development committee at a regular meeting on monday november 15. they recommended as amended as a committee report bearing a new title as an ordinance amended
the planning code requiring that any change of use to a medical use that will occupy a space exceeding 10,000 gross square feet of floor area containing consistency from the planning department or commission promotes the goals as recommended with the master plan. supervisor chiu: if i could ask everyone to walk out as quietly as a ballerina. with that, i would like to acknowledge supervisor campos on this item. supervisor campos: it is interesting that we have a tutu issue followed by legislation introduced by a gay supervisor. thank you very much, colleagues.
i want to begin by thanking the co-sponsors of this legislation who have very patiently worked with us for the last few months -- actually, more than seven months that we have been working on this legislation. so i want to begin by thanking supervisors maxwell, chiu, mirkarimi, daly, avalos, mar for their co sponsorship -- co- sponsorship. i want to thank my staff for all the work they have done putting this legislation together. this legislation has been vetted through a long process. it came out of land use yesterday with a recommendation. prior to that, it was supported by the health commission, which
supported the legislation on a 6-1 vote and support it as well by the planning commission on a 5-1 vote. i do not want to repeat what has been said about this legislation, but needless to say, there has been many discussions with a large number of stakeholders, and we have repeatedly tried to be inclusive, transparent, and this process could not have gotten us to this point without the input of so many people, beginning with the director wrote public health, mitch katz, the incoming director, and their staff, as well as the planning director
and his staff, as well as so many stakeholders, including members of the industry. the hospital council, and community members. so to all of them, thank you. a number of amendments have been made to the legislation that we believe have allowed us to strike the right balance between all of the competing interests and i know that we have a pretty full agenda, so i do not want to belabor the point. i would simply ask colleagues for your support of this legislation today. thank you very much. supervisor dufty: thank you. i want to thank supervisor campos. there were times at which some of our major health care institutions and hospitals have expressed concern about the implications of this legislation. truthfully, i looked at it as what i see as a very important
tool for the future of the city and a process that i believe in retrospect 20 or 30 years from now will be seen as a significant step to comprehensive look at health care -- comprehensively look at health care in san francisco. it was way back in 1974 that the requirement was begun at the state level the counties have to have hearings about potential cuts in public health services and in health care, and it was very controversial at the time. there were efforts made to curtail the process, and over many years, we have become commonplace a round of hearings that have taken place, and i think they have provided a mechanism which helped us as a legislative body of the city and county of san francisco to be sensitive and attuned to the implications of health cuts, and i think it helped to establish the role of the budget process
here in protecting those vital services and to think about what would happen in counties around california if there was not that tool that people could publicly challenged the reduction of health services. this is a significant measure to get the city to look comprehensively, and going forward, to ensure that we consider what those decisions are that bring together health policy and land use policy. i'm especially appreciative that supervisor campos has made this perspective. from the standpoint of some of the upcoming renovations required for seismic services, it is clear that we want to see projects happen, and that there will be full vetting and consideration by the board of supervisors, but i want to commend him and acknowledged that many of the stakeholders sat down with us from cpmc, the
hospital council, and i think they recognize that this is a prospective process that will be helpful for the city. i appreciate the support from our outgoing health director and our incoming director of public health, who really see this as a valuable tool, as well as members of the planning commission and health commission, who have almost unanimously spoken up about this process and seen as extremely helpful. i really appreciate the amendments that supervisor campos has offered, and i look forward to supporting this legislation. supervisor maxwell: san francisco -- first of all, let me thank supervisor campos and all the community and all the folks from our different hospitals. san francisco is positioning itself to be a very important medical help. because of that, we need to be especially aware of our own medical facilities and what we have and how we treat the people
that live in san francisco. how can we go out and say, "this is the place you need to be," and the folks that need the help the most do not have that kind of care? we are positioning ourselves to truly be a model and saying that every place in san francisco, every person can get to the care they need in the time they need it. that is extremely important. all the hospitals have done a great job. they have helped us with everything we needed. without them, we could not have had it. they have a lot of planners on their staff. i look forward to them being a huge part of this process as well as our community. again, i want to thank everyone that has participated in this, and i look forward to everyone spoke -- everyone's vote and san francisco moving forward. >> can you explain the appeal process in this legislation?
tell me how this works with conditional use appeals and environmental appeals. talk to me about the three tracks. >> kate stacy from the city attorney's office. the legislation has the hearing and determination at the same time. it does not address the ceqa process at all in the legislation. the appeals process section 342.6 has an appeal either to the board of supervisors if the board of supervisors has authority over the entitlement, or if the board of supervisors does not have authority, it would go to the board of appeals. >> "authority over entitlement" means potential use permit needs to be approved? >> i think the entitlement
refers to the actual approval, like a conditional use permit legislation. the ceqa process is a separate process not directly addressed in this legislation. >> to appeal something with conditional use, there is one standard to appeal the environmental determination. what is the standard to appeal this consistency determination? four signatures? one signature? how do you get it to board? >> it is within 30 days of the issuance or denial of the consistency. any person may file an appeal. it may be one person. >> it mirrors the ceqa appeal route instead of the conditional use route, which means a certain percentage of the people within a radius, correct? >> that is correct. it is more like the ceqa appeal process where one person could
appeal within that 30 days. >> so any individual, regardless of whether or not 11 supervisors and seven commissioners think it is consistent, and any person regardless of where they live, could appeal it? >> that is correct. >> or one person testifying as an organization. for example, the california nurses association would like to appeal consistency. do they have the ability to appeal? >> the legislation says any person may file an appeal. >> so an individual from the group could. if the conditional use permit is unanimously approved, if the ceqa documents are unanimously approved, it would not matter if there was an argument that there was no consistency? in other words, you could have three things appealed to the board -- conditional use gets approved, environmental doctrine gets approved, the six board members find that there's not
consistency, the project has to go back to figure out how to find consistency. is that fair? it is not as if one of these appeals could trump the other. they are all equal. >> supervisors, the legislation in section 342.6 says that the board of supervisors may reverse the decision, and that decision is final. there is no discussion as to what actions would come next, but theoretically, an applicant could go back and change the project application in order to address the concerns and achieve consistency. >> i just the subject of the appeal, theoretically, you could have one individual who does not even live in san francisco appeal this. the conditional use permit could be approved. the environmental document could be approved, but if six members find there is no consistency, and the project cannot move forward, even though it is
environmentally sound and meets all the requirements of a conditional use permit? >> the legislation has as a prerequisite -- it provides that the planning department, zoning administrator, and all other involved city agencies shall not approve entitlement for medical use unless the medical use has obtained a consistency determination from the planning department or planning commission. the planning commission has the option of finding that countervailing public policy decision justifying a full of that application, not withstanding possible inconsistency with the health care master plan. >> it might be consistent but not been finally approved. i get that. what i'm trying to point out is the reverse. it could absolutely crystal clear, legal under ceqa, a crystal clear under our conditional use guidelines, but if it is not consistent with this master plan, environmental does not matter.
conditional use does not matter. >> the consistency determination is a separate requirement for approval, except in cases where -- >> there is the very real scenario that sequel would be supported it to this, that conditional use guidelines would be supported to this, and that any individual, if they feel that way and are able to convince the majority of the board. i do not think this appeals process has been thoroughly -- you're shaking your head. tell me that i'm wrong. tell me that a scenario i just pointed out is incorrect. i have not heard back from the city attorney. maybe you could point that out. supervisor chiu: if it is ok, supervisor campos for a response. supervisor campos: a couple points. first of all, in terms of the significance of the consistency finding by the planning commission in consultation wit